317 Vim key bindings for Firefox 691 Use gf to open a file via its URL. Not for the Emacs keybindings (which are fine), but for the entire elisp ecosystem. A text-based web browser such as elinks can extract a formatted view of the. I used Emacs for 20 years and while I've strayed away from it (got interested in Vim), I'm slowly making my way back.
#ELINKS KEYBINDINGS FULL#
Finally, because it is a full Lisp environment, you have 30+ years of accumulated Lisp programs that you can run (some of which have no equal on any platform). You have a windowing environment, you can integrate other programs including terminal shells, debuggers, etc, etc. And although people jokingly refer to it as an OS (and even the kitchen sink is included - as an icon), it's really more like a shell.
None of this is a replacement for real a11y testing most a11y technology leverages mainstream browsers (Chromium, FF, Safari, et cetera).Although the OP posted himself, one thing I try to explain to people who don't use Emacs very much is that instead of thinking of it as an editor with a Lisp extension language, it's better to think of it as a Lisp environment with a built in editor. I test with pandoc's strict markdown output and make sure the resulting markdown is readable: If you want to go the extra mile and ensure that your website works with the most basic HTML parsers, try sending it through an HTML-to-Markdown converter that doesn't include inline html in the Markdown output. Originally written for blind users, it's great for sighted users as well. Other keybindings worth mention are alpine the application I use to read my email, irsii my IRC client of choice and urxvt. depends recommends suggests enhances dep: libc6 (> 2. bind p exec urxvt -e elinks When it comes to using the bindings in RatPoison, one must first press the escape sequence, in this case ctrl-f, thus if I wanted to open Firefox, I would type ctrl-f followed by the letter f. Bombadillo supports gopher, gemini, and finger protocols, featuring a full terminal user interface, vim-like keybindings, document pager, configurable settings, and a robust command selection.
With the exception of a few whitespace characters, their output of both seems to be identical.Įdbrowse is a line-mode browser that supports JavaScript via Duktape. elinks-doc pterm Non-web client for the terminal. Mozilla's Readability is written in JS these tools are written in C and Go, respectively. I also like to diff my website's HTML against the HTML output of these tools, just to see how much extraneous HTML I have. Testing in these ensures that your website will work in Firefox's Reader Mode. Pipe that into w3m/lynx/links to read articles in the terminal.
Rdrview, go-readability: these are CLI utilities that use Mozilla's Readability algorithm to send HTML of just the article to stdout. Oh, hello there again! It's always good to see people testing their site on non-mainstream user-agents. That is how I think of users who use the popular graphical browsers, waiting arbitray amounts of time on every website for pages to "load", making dozens of unnecessary connections to third party servers. Funny how he calls anyone who would use a text-only browser exclusively a "masochist". Of course, this is not a topic anyone really cares about. I would love to do a side-by-side comparison of text-only browsers. (this is what initially hoookd me on links) and 2. To answer your question, the two biggest reasons I would always choose links over lynx is 1. It makes me think they do not actually use a text-only browser much (e.g., once in a while), and that they have not tried them all. It baffles me when people recommend lynx today. I used lynx through a public access UNIX system for some years. As an internet user beginning the late 80's, I always tried every linemode or text-only browser I heard about. It is my primary browser for recreational web use. Bias disclosure: I have been a links user for over 20 years.
0 kommentar(er)
